moon_guardfandomcom-20200213-history
Stormwind Rules of Evidence
The Stormwind Rules of Evidence '''are the rules set forth to admit evidence to all trials and hearings in the Kingdom of Stormwind's courts. The Rules are established and amended by the Board of Examiners of the courts. Disclaimers '''Note: ''This document was originally produced as part of the Stormwind Law Project, for the purpose of enhancing Stormwind City's guard and criminal roleplay on Moon Guard US. All laws and rules apply only to those who opt-in. '' Note: ''Magistrates under the Stormwind Law Project will be expected to follow and uphold these rules while carrying out a criminal trial proceeding from "initial appearance" to sentencing.'' Rules ARTICLE I. GENERAL PROVISIONS Rule 101. Scope; Definitions a. Scope. These rules apply to proceedings in the courts of law of the Kingdom of Stormwind and its territories, including but not limited to: # Stormwind City; # Elwynn Forest; # Westfall; # the Redridge Mountains; # Duskwood; # the Burning Steppes, also known as the Red Steppes; # Deadwind Pass; # Stranglethorn Vale; # the Swamp of Sorrows; # the Black Morass, also known as the Blasted Lands; and # all territories governed by the Kingdom of Stormwind that are not under martial law. b. Definitions. In these rules: # “civil case” means a civil action or proceeding; # “criminal case” includes a criminal proceeding; # “public office” includes a public agency; # “record” includes a memorandum, report, or data compilation; # a “rule prescribed by the Board of Examiners” means a rule adopted by the Board of Examiners under statutory authority; and # a reference to any kind of written material or any other medium includes magically or mechanically stored information. Rule 102. Purpose. These rules should be construed so as to administer every proceeding fairly, eliminate unjustifiable expense and delay, and promote the development of evidence law, to the end of ascertaining the truth and securing a just determination. Rule 103. Rulings on Evidence a. The court shall refuse to admit any evidence that does not satisfy the applicable rules. b. If the court admits evidence in error, and that error affects the substantial rights of a party, the party must: # Timely object to the evidence and move to strike it from the record; and # State the specific grounds, unless it was apparent from the context. c. If the court excludes evidence in error, and that error affects the substantial rights of a party, the party must: # Timely object; and # Make an offer of proof, in which the evidence is described and discussed. d. Once the court rules definitively on the record, the error is preserved and further objections on the matter need not be raised. e. Preventing the jury from hearing inadmissible evidence. The court shall, insofar as it is practicable, ensure that a jury is not presented with inadmissible evidence. Rule 104. Limiting Scope of Evidence If the court admits evidence that is admissible against one party or for a specific purpose, the court shall restrict that evidence to its proper scope and instruct the jury accordingly. Rule 105. Complete Document Doctrine If a party introduces all or part of a writing or recorded statement, an adverse party may require the introduction, at that time, of any other part — or any other writing or recorded statement — that in fairness ought to be considered at the same time. ARTICLE II. JUDICIAL NOTICE Rule 201. Judicial Notice a. The court may judicially notice a fact that is not subject to reasonable dispute because it can be accurately and readily determined from sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned. b. Taking Notice. The court: # may take judicial notice on its own; or # must take judicial notice if a party requests it and the court is supplied with the necessary information. c. Timing. The court may take judicial notice at any stage of the proceeding. d. In a criminal case before a jury, the court must instruct the jury that it may or may not accept the noticed fact as conclusive. ARTICLE III (Reserved for future rulemaking) ARTICLE IV. RELEVANCE AND ITS LIMITS Rule 401. Relevance Evidence is relevant if: a. It has a tendency to make a fact in question more or less probable than it would be without the evidence; and b. The fact in question is of consequences to the court’s ruling on the case. Rule 402. Admissibility Based Upon Relevance a. Irrelevant evidence is not admissible. b. Relevant evidence is admissible unless one of the following provides otherwise: # the Grand Charter of Stormwind; # the Laws of Stormwind; # these rules; or # any other rules prescribed by the Board of Examiners. Rule 403. Excluding Relevant Evidence The court may exclude relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of one or more of the following: a. unfair prejudice; b. confusing the issues; c. misleading the jury; d. undue delay; e. wasting time; or f. needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. Rule 404. (Reserved) Rule 405. Character Evidence and Evidence of Past Crimes a. Character evidence. Evidence of a person’s character or character trait is not admissible to prove that on a particular occasion the person acted in accordance with the character or trait. b. Past criminal history. Evidence of a crime, wrong, or other act is not admissible to prove a person’s character in order to show that on a particular occasion the person acted in accordance with the character. c. Permitted uses. This evidence may be admissible for another purpose, such as proving motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, absence of mistake, or lack of accident. d. Proving Character by Reputation or Opinion. When evidence of a person’s character or character trait is admissible, it may be proved by testimony about the person’s reputation or by testimony in the form of an opinion. On cross-examination of the character witness, the court may allow an inquiry into relevant specific instances of the person’s conduct. e. Proving Character by Specific Instances of Conduct. When a person’s character or character trait is an essential element of a charge, claim, or defense, the character or trait may also be proved by relevant specific instances of the person’s conduct. f. Use of the Holy Light on a Party or Witness. A party or witness’s adverse reaction to the Holy Light is not admissible to demonstrate the party or witness’s character, honesty, or clarity of conscience in the matter. Rule 406. Habit and Routine Practice Evidence of a person’s habit or an organization’s routine practice may be admitted to prove that on a particular occasion the person or organization acted in accordance with the habit or routine practice. Rule 407. Liability Insurance Evidence that a person was or was not insured against liability is not admissible to prove whether the person acted negligently or otherwise wrongfully. But the court may admit this evidence for another purpose, such as proving a witness’s bias or prejudice or proving agency, ownership, or control. Rule 408. Negotiations a. Evidence of the following is not admissible on behalf of either party to prove or disprove the validity of a claim or charge, except as provided elsewhere within these rules: # An offer of settlement or negotiation therefor; # Offers to pay medical expenses arising from an injury alleged in the case; # A guilty plea later withdrawn; # A nolo contendere plea; # Any plea bargain or negotiation therefor; or # Conduct or statements made during the above negotiations. b. The court may admit this evidence for another purpose, such as proving a witness’s bias or prejudice, negating a contention of undue delay, or proving an effort to obstruct a criminal investigation or prosecution. Rule 409. Subsequent Remedial Measures When measures are taken that would have made an earlier injury or harm less likely to occur, evidence of the subsequent measures is not admissible to prove: a. negligence; b. culpable conduct; c. a defect in a product or its design; or d. a need for a warning or instruction. But the court may admit this evidence for another purpose, such as impeachment or — if disputed — proving ownership, control, or the feasibility of precautionary measures. ARTICLE V. PRIVILEGE Rule 501. Privilege in General. The common law — as interpreted by Stormwind courts in the light of reason and experience — governs a claim of privilege unless any of the following provides otherwise: a. the Grand Charter; b. the Laws of Stormwind; or c. rules prescribed by the Board of Examiners. Rule 502. Applicability of Privilege. Testimony or other evidence to which privilege applies is not admissible. ARTICLE VI. WITNESSES Rule 601. Competency. a. Every person is assumed competent and able to testify as a witness unless these rules provide otherwise. b. The magistrate presiding over the case may not testify as a witness. c. Counsel for either party may not testify as a witness. d. A juror or other finder of fact may not testify as a witness to the trial. A juror may testify in an appeal regarding statements or conduct of impaneled jurors during deliberations. Rule 602. Personal Knowledge. a. A witness may only testify to matters of which he has personal knowledge. Evidence must be presented to support this personal knowledge, which evidence may include the witness’s testimony. b. This rule does not apply to expert witnesses, whose testimony is governed by Article VII. Rule 603. Oath or Affirmation to Testify Truthfully; Interpreters. a. Before testifying, a witness must give an oath or affirmation to testify truthfully. b. An interpreter must be qualified and must give an oath or affirmation to make a true translation. Rule 604. Impeaching a Witness. Any party, including the party that called the witness, may attack the witness’s credibility. Rule 605. Impeaching Witness’s Character for Truthfulness. A witness’s credibility may be attacked or supported by testimony about the witness’s reputation for having a character for truthfulness or untruthfulness, or by testimony in the form of an opinion about that character. But evidence of truthful character is admissible only after the witness’s character for truthfulness has been attacked. Rule 606. Impeachment by Evidence of Prior Conviction. a. Except as provided elsewhere in this rule, for any crime regardless of the punishment, the evidence must be admitted if the court can readily determine that establishing the elements of the crime required proving — or the witness’s admitting — a dishonest act or false statement. b. Where the witness is the defendant, the evidence may be admitted if the court determines that the probative value of the evidence outweighs its prejudicial effect. c. Evidence of a conviction is not admissible where: # Two years have passed since the conviction; or # The conviction was overturned on appeal, annulled, pardoned, or expunged. Rule 607. Religious Beliefs or Opinions. Evidence of a witness’s religious beliefs or opinions is not admissible to attack or support the witness’s credibility. Rule 608. Mode and Order of Examining Witnesses. a. For all examination of witnesses, the following order will be followed: # The party calling the witness examines the witness (“direct examination”), and then announces that he passes the witness. # The adverse party cross-examines the witness, and then announces that he passes the witness. # The party calling the witness may briefly rehabilitate the witness, and then announces that he passes the witness. # The court may examine the witness, or dismiss the witness. b. During cross-examination, the witness may only be questioned as to the subject matter of the direct examination and the witness’s credibility and truthfulness. c. During rehabilitation, and the court’s examination, the witness may only be questioned as to the evidence presented during his testimony. No new evidence may be admitted. d. Leading questions should not be used on direct examination except as necessary to develop the witness’s testimony. Ordinarily, the court should allow leading questions: # on cross-examination; and # when a party calls a hostile witness, an adverse party, or a witness identified with an adverse party. Rule 609. Witness’s Prior Statement. a. Showing or Disclosing the Statement During Examination. When examining a witness about the witness’s prior statement, a party need not show it or disclose its contents to the witness. But the party must, on request, show it or disclose its contents to an adverse party’s attorney. b. Extrinsic Evidence of a Prior Inconsistent Statement. Extrinsic evidence of a witness’s prior inconsistent statement is admissible only if the witness is given an opportunity to explain or deny the statement and an adverse party is given an opportunity to examine the witness about it, or if justice so requires. Rule 610. Excluding Witnesses. a. At a party’s request, the court must order witnesses excluded so that they cannot hear other witnesses’ testimony. b. The court may exclude witnesses on its own initiative, except when the witness is: # a party in the case; # a person whose presence a party shows to be essential to presenting the party’s claim or defense; or # authorized by statute to be present. ARTICLE VII. EXPERT TESTIMONY. Rule 701. Lay Witnesses and Opinion Testimony. If a witness is not testifying as an expert, testimony in the form of an opinion is limited to one that is: a. rationally based on the witness’s perception; b. helpful to clearly understanding the witness’s testimony or to determining a fact in issue; and c. not based on scientific, magical, technical, or other specialized knowledge within the scope of Rule 702. Rule 702. Testimony by Expert Witnesses. A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if: a. the expert’s scientific, magical, technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue; b. the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data; c. the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and d. the expert has reliably applied the principles and methods to the facts of the case. Rule 703. Bases of an Expert. An expert may base an opinion on facts or data in the case that the expert has been made aware of or personally observed. If experts in the particular field would reasonably rely on those kinds of facts or data in forming an opinion on the subject, they need not be admissible for the opinion to be admitted. Rule 704. Opinion on an Ultimate Issue. An expert witness must not state an opinion about whether the defendant did or did not have a mental state or condition that constitutes an element of the crime charged or of a defense. Those matters are for the trier of fact alone. Rule 705. Disclosing Facts or Data Underlying an Expert. Unless the court orders otherwise, an expert may state an opinion — and give the reasons for it — without first testifying to the underlying facts or data. But the expert may be required to disclose those facts or data on cross-examination. ((Work in progress.)) ARTICLE VIII. HEARSAY. Rule 801. Definitions That Apply to This Article. a. “Statement” means a person’s oral assertion, written assertion, or nonverbal conduct, if the person intended it as an assertion. b. “Declarant” means the person who made the statement. c. “Hearsay” means a statement that: # the declarant does not make while testifying at the current trial or hearing; and # a party offers in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted in the statement. Rule 802. Statements That Are Not Hearsay. a. A Declarant-Witness’s Prior Statement. The declarant testifies and is subject to cross-examination about a prior statement, and the statement: # is inconsistent with the declarant’s testimony and was given under oath; or # is consistent with the declarant’s testimony and is offered: ## (a) to rebut an express or implied charge that the declarant recently fabricated it or acted from a recent improper influence or motive in so testifying; or ## (b) to rehabilitate the declarant’s credibility as a witness when attacked on another ground; or # identifies a person as someone the declarant perceived earlier. b. An Opposing Party’s Statement. The statement is offered against an opposing party and: # was made by the party; # is one the party manifested that it adopted or believed to be true; # was made by a person whom the party authorized to make a statement on the subject; # was made by the party’s agent or employee on a matter within the scope of that relationship and while it existed; or # was made by the party’s coconspirator during and in furtherance of the conspiracy. Rule 803. The Rule Against Hearsay. Hearsay is not admissible unless any of the following provides otherwise: a. The Grand Charter; b. The Laws of Stormwind; c. These rules; or d. Other rules prescribed by the Board of Examiners. Rule 804. Exceptions to the Rule Against Hearsay. The following are not excluded by the rule against hearsay, regardless of whether the declarant is available as a witness: a. Present Sense Impression. A statement describing or explaining an event or condition, made while or immediately after the declarant perceived it. b. Excited Utterance. A statement relating to a startling event or condition, made while the declarant was under the stress of excitement that it caused. c. Then-Existing Mental, Emotional, or Physical Condition. A statement of the declarant’s then-existing state of mind (such as motive, intent, or plan) or emotional, sensory, or physical condition (such as mental feeling, pain, or bodily health), but not including a statement of memory or belief to prove the fact remembered or believed unless it relates to the validity or terms of the declarant’s will. d. Statement Made for Medical Diagnosis or Treatment. A statement that: # is made for — and is reasonably pertinent to — medical diagnosis or treatment; and # describes medical history; past or present symptoms or sensations; their inception; or their general cause. (e) Criminal Incident Reports. ''A statement describing or explaining an event or condition, if # the creation of the report is part of normal operating procedure and recordkeeping of the arresting agency, # it is introduced into evidence by the arresting officer who created it, and # the arresting officer is made available for cross-examination about it. '''Rule 805. Exceptions to the Rule for Unavailable Declarant.' a. Criteria for Being Unavailable. A declarant is considered to be unavailable as a witness if the declarant: # is exempted from testifying about the subject matter of the declarant’s statement because the court rules that a privilege applies; # refuses to testify about the subject matter despite a court order to do so; # testifies to not remembering the subject matter; or # cannot be present or testify at the trial or hearing because of death or a then-existing infirmity, physical illness, or mental illness. But this subdivision (a) does not apply if the statement’s proponent procured or wrongfully caused the declarant’s unavailability as a witness in order to prevent the declarant from attending or testifying. b. The Exceptions. The following are not excluded by the rule against hearsay if the declarant is unavailable as a witness: # Former Testimony. Testimony that was given as a witness at a trial, hearing, or lawful deposition, whether given during the current proceeding or a different one. # Statement Under the Belief of Imminent Death. In a prosecution for homicide or in a civil case, a statement that the declarant, while believing the declarant’s death to be imminent, made about its cause or circumstances. # Statement Against Interest. A statement that: ## (a) a reasonable person in the declarant’s position would have made only if the person believed it to be true because, when made, it was so contrary to the declarant’s proprietary or pecuniary interest or had so great a tendency to invalidate the declarant’s claim against someone else or to expose the declarant to civil or criminal liability; and ## (b) is supported by corroborating circumstances that clearly indicate its trustworthiness, if it is offered in a criminal case as one that tends to expose the declarant to criminal liability. # Statement Offered Against a Party That Wrongfully Caused the Declarant’s Unavailability. A statement offered against a party that wrongfully caused — or acquiesced in wrongfully causing — the declarant’s unavailability as a witness, and did so intending that result. Rule 806. Hearsay Within Hearsay. Hearsay within hearsay is not excluded by the rule against hearsay if each part of the combined statements conforms with an exception to the rule. Rule 807. Attacking and Supporting the Declarant. When a hearsay statement — or a statement described in Rule 802 — has been admitted in evidence, the declarant’s credibility may be attacked, and then supported, by any evidence that would be admissible for those purposes if the declarant had testified as a witness. The court may admit evidence of the declarant’s inconsistent statement or conduct, regardless of when it occurred or whether the declarant had an opportunity to explain or deny it. If the party against whom the statement was admitted calls the declarant as a witness, the party may examine the declarant on the statement as if on cross-examination. ARTICLE IX. AUTHENTICATION OF EVIDENCE Rule 901. Authenticating or Identifying Evidence. a. In General. To satisfy the requirement of authenticating or identifying an item of evidence, the person offering it must produce sufficient evidence to support a finding that the item is what he claims it is. b. Examples. The following are examples only — not a complete list — of evidence that satisfies the requirement: # Testimony of a Witness with Knowledge. Testimony that an item is what it is claimed to be. # Nonexpert Opinion About Handwriting. A nonexpert’s opinion that handwriting is genuine, based on a familiarity with it that was not acquired for the current litigation. # Comparison by an Expert Witness or the Trier of Fact. A comparison with an authenticated specimen by an expert witness or the trier of fact. # Distinctive Characteristics and the Like. The appearance, contents, substance, internal patterns, or other distinctive characteristics of the item, taken together with all the circumstances. # Opinion About a Voice. An opinion identifying a person’s voice — whether heard firsthand or through mechanical or magical transmission or recording — based on hearing the voice at any time under circumstances that connect it with the alleged speaker. # Evidence About Public Records. Evidence that: ## (a) a document was recorded or filed in a public office as authorized by law; or ## (b) a purported public record or statement is from the office where items of this kind are kept. # Evidence About a Process or System. Evidence describing a process or system and showing that it produces an accurate result. # Methods Provided by a Statute or Rule. Any method of authentication or identification allowed by a statute or a rule prescribed by the Board of Examiners. Rule 902. Subscribing Witness A subscribing witness’s testimony is necessary to authenticate a writing only if required by the law of the jurisdiction that governs its validity. ARTICLE X. CONTENTS OF WRITINGS, RECORDINGS, AND IMAGES. Rule 1001. Definitions that Apply to This Article. In this article: a. A “writing” consists of letters, words, numbers, or their equivalent set down in any form. b. A “recording” consists of letters, words, numbers, or their equivalent recorded in any manner. c. An “image” means a photographic image or its equivalent stored in any form. d. An “original” of a writing or recording means the writing or recording itself or any counterpart intended to have the same effect by the person who executed or issued it. An “original” of a photograph includes the negative or a print from it. e. A “duplicate” means a counterpart produced by a mechanical, magical, photographic, chemical, or other equivalent process or technique that accurately reproduces the original. Rule 1002. Requirement of the Original. a. An original writing, recording, or image is required in order to prove its content unless these rules or the Laws of Stormwind provide otherwise. b. A duplicate is admissible to the same extent as the original unless a genuine question is raised about the original’s authenticity or the circumstances make it unfair to admit the duplicate. c. An original is not required and other evidence of the content of a writing, recording, or image is admissible if: # all the originals are lost or destroyed, and not by the proponent acting in bad faith; # an original cannot be obtained by any available judicial process; # the party against whom the original would be offered had control of the original; was at that time put on notice, by pleadings or otherwise, that the original would be a subject of proof at the trial or hearing; and fails to produce it at the trial or hearing; or # the writing, recording, or photograph is not closely related to a controlling issue. Rule 1003. Summaries to Prove Content. The person offering the writing, recording, or image may use a summary, chart, or calculation to prove the content of voluminous writings, recordings, or images that cannot be conveniently examined in court. The person offering must make the originals or duplicates available for examination or copying, or both, by other parties at a reasonable time and place. And the court may order him to produce them in court. Rule 1004. Testimony or Statement of Adverse Party to Prove Content. The proponent may prove the content of a writing, recording, or photograph by the testimony, deposition, or written statement of the party against whom the evidence is offered. The proponent need not account for the original. Acknowledgments These Rules of Evidence are based upon the Federal Rules of Evidence of the United States of America. They were altered for use in this setting and compiled by the joint effort of Arranax and Jeremaias, and approved for use by Maxen. These rules are not intended to be used to obstruct the smooth and entertaining flow of roleplay. They are intended to help prevent IC courts from having to reinvent the wheel and therefore turning out inconsistent and unfair verdicts and sentences, and to give all roleplayers a concrete picture of what they may expect from law-enforcement and criminal roleplay. The rules are subject to amendment by the decisions of the Board of Examiners. Amendments will be published to the House of Nobles website, and edits will be made accordingly to this page. Category:Documents Category:Legal Documents Category:Kingdom of Stormwind Category:Laws of Stormwind Category:Stormwind Law Project Category:Stormwind House of Magistrates